1

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2766  OF 2009        [ARISING OUT OF S.L.P.(C) NO. 16006 OF 2007]

SURENDRA SINGH BENIWAL        ...APPELLANT

VERSUS

HUKAM SINGH & ORS.               ...RESPONDENTS

O R D E R  

1 Leave granted. 1-A. This appeal is directed against the impugned judgment dated 26.6.2000  

passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Uttrakhand by means of which  

the Division Bench dismissed the Special Appeal filed by the appellant against the  

judgment of learned Single Judge who had dismissed the review petition filed by  

the  appellant.

2. The brief facts of the case are that respondent No.1  was appointed as  

Lecturer  in  English  on  15.1.1981  in  Murli  Manohar  Inter  College  Ishurteel,  

District  Muzaffarnagar.  Thereafter, respondent No. 1,  on his own request, was  

transferred  from  the  Murli  Manohar  Inter  College  to  Panna  Lal  Bhalla  

Municipal Inter College, Hardiwar on 21.7.1997.  Since then the respondent No.1  

has been continuously working in the said institution as lecturer  in  English.  The  

appellant  was  promoted as  

lecturer  in  Panna  Lal  Bhalla  Municipal  Inter  College  on  6.11.1989.  The

2

authorities  concerned   issued  seniority  list  on  26.12.2000 showing  the  date  of  

appointment of respondent No. 1 as lecturer in English w.e.f. 15.1.1981 while the  

date  of  seniority  of  appellant  was shown as  6.11.1989.   The seniority  list  was  

issued after the approval of District Inspector of Schools.  Appellant was given  

ad-hoc promotion to the post of Principal on 1.7.2001.  

3. Respondent  No.  1   made  a  representation  before  the  authority  

concerned regarding his seniority and claimed that he should be placed at serial  

number 1  in  the  seniority  list  on  the  basis  of  his  seniority  as  lecturer  as  the  

respondent No.1  was much senior to the appellant, but to no avail.  

4. Feeling aggrieved by the seniority list, respondent No. 1  filed a writ  

petition  before  the  High  Court.   The  learned  Single  Judge  by  order  dated  

8.12.2006 allowed the writ petition.

5. Aggrieved by the order of learned Single Judge, he appellant filed a  

review petition which was rejected by order dated 23.2.2007.

6. Against the dismissal of review petition, the  appellant filed  a Special  

Appeal before the High Court which was also dismissed on 20.6.2007.  Hence, the  

present appeal by special leave.

7. We have  heard  learned counsel  appearing  for  the  parties  and  have  

gone through the record.

8. The short question involved in this case is about the interpretation of  

Rule 61(2) of  the Regulations framed under U.P. Intermediate Education Act,  

1921 which reads as under:  

“61(2): A teacher on being transferred in pursuance of this Chapter-

a) shall become the teacher of the institution to which he has been  

transferred and his pay and service condition shall remain the same unless

3

legally varied.

(b) shall be placed at the bottom of the seniority list of the teachers  

serving on the same cadre and category in the institution.

(c) in  compliance  to  the  provisions  of  sub-clause(b)  the  service  

rendered prior to the transfer in the institution from which the teacher  

has  been  transferred  shall  be  treated  as  service  rendered  to  the  

institution to which he has been transferred.”  

9. A perusal of clause (b)  of the aforesaid Rule shows that if a teacher  

goes on voluntary transfer from one  institution to another, then the transferee  

teacher shall be placed at the bottom of the seniority list of the teachers serving  

on the same cadre and category in the transferee institution. As regards clause  

(c), in our opinion, it has  to  be read  harmoniously with clause (b)  

and so reading it, we are of the opinion   that clause (c)  deals with  matters other  

than seniority e.g. pensionary  benefits etc.  However, as regards seniority, the  

clear rule has been laid down in clause (b) i.e. that if a teacher seeks voluntary  

transfer  from  college/institution  to  another  college/institution,  the  transferee  

teacher shall be placed  at the bottom of the seniority list. The reason for making  

Rule 61(2)(b) is obvious.  When a teacher applies for voluntary transfer  from  

one college to another, then if his seniority in the old college  is maintained in the  

new college, there would be great heart burning in the teachers in the transferee  

college.  Hence, the rule was made that if a teacher applies for  voluntary transfer  

from one college to another,  such a transfer  can only be done by placing the  

transferee teacher at the bottom of the seniority list of the teachers serving on the  

same cadre and category in the transferee institution.

4

10. As regards the words “same cadre and category”, much has been made  

out of it in the impugned judgment.  However,  we are of the opinion that the  

interpretation given in the impugned judgment is not correct.    

11. Since the respondent No. 1 applied for a voluntary  transfer, obviously,  

he has to  be placed at the bottom of the seniority list of the lecturers already  

working there.  This is the meaning of the words”same cadre and category”.

12. In the facts and circumstances of the case, this appeal is allowed and  

the judgment of the Division Bench as well as of learned Single Judge are set-

aside. The writ petition is dismissed. No orders.

      .........................J.      [ MARKANDEY KATJU ]

            ..........................J.      [ H.L. DATTU ]

NEW DELHI APRIL 23, 2009.